State v. Adams
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtKrupansky, J.
R. C. 2151.26 and Juv. R. 30 provide the procedural mechanism by which a juvenile offender may be “bound over” to the adult court, and then tried as though he were an adult. In the instant case, this procedure was followed in Summit County, but was followed for each juvenile as to the charges stemming from only one of the two robberies committed in Lake County. Therefore, the central issue raised by these appeals and cross-appeal is whether the defendants were effectively bound over on all the offenses for which they were ultimately indicted, thus rendering all their convictions valid,…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Kent v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1966
- Whitehead v. General Telephone Co.Ohio Supreme Court · 1969
- State v. KlingenbergerOhio Supreme Court · 1925
- In Re BennOhio Court of Appeals · 1969
3Cited by24 opinions
- State v. WilsonOhio Supreme Court · 1995
- State v. WatsonOhio Supreme Court · 1989
- State v. D.W.Ohio Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. D.W.Ohio Supreme Court · 2012
- State v. DouglasOhio Supreme Court · 1985
19 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.